Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to get more info on formatting

(1) Leave the name field empty if you want to post as Anonymous. It's preferable that you choose a name so it becomes clear who said what. E-mail address is not mandatory either. The website automatically checks for spam. Please refer to our moderation policies for more details. We check to make sure that no comment is mistakenly marked as spam. This takes time and effort, so please be patient until your comment appears. Thanks.

(2) 10 replies to a comment are the maximum.

(3) Here are formating examples which you can use in your writing:
<b>bold text</b> results in bold text
<i>italic text</i> results in italic text
(You can also combine two formating tags with each other, for example to get bold-italic text.)
<em>emphasized text</em> results in emphasized text
<strong>strong text</strong> results in strong text
<q>a quote text</q> results in a quote text (quotation marks are added automatically)
<cite>a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited</cite> results in:a phrase or a block of text that needs to be cited
<blockquote>a heavier version of quoting a block of text...</blockquote> results in:

a heavier version of quoting a block of text that can span several lines. Use these possibilities appropriately. They are meant to help you create and follow the discussions in a better way. They can assist in grasping the content value of a comment more quickly.

and last but not least:
<a href=''http://link-address.com''>Name of your link</a> results in Name of your link

(4)No need to use this special character in between paragraphs:&nbsp;You do not need it anymore. Just write as you like and your paragraphs will be separated.The "Live Preview" appears automatically when you start typing below the text area and it will show you how your comment will look like before you send it.

(5) If you now think that this is too confusing then just ignore the code above and write as you like.

Terifying. Thanks for the link, though.
I hope and pray that Engdahl is wrong, but there are strong odds that he is right.

I do think his point about American canniness might be overstated. Not the lying part, but the part where he says American success since WW2 is proof that they are doing something right.

the USA came out of WW2 so much stronger than anyone else becauyse it had fought less, and had the enormous wealth of a continent to draw on, and the rest of the world was on its knees. So, with that enormous “already on third base” advantage, maybe Engdahl overstates and overestimates the brains of the Americans. But surely not their overriding will to control, to win at any cost. To think this is going to ensure American “security.”

I also see the danger that if Russia/Putin is cornered, as Engdahl predicts, then Russia might play the nuclear card, as suggested by commenters on other threads.

I think any agreement to limit military action by Russia is nuts, when obviously the Americans and other parties are carrying right on—illegally, to boot. Again, there seems to be this weird one-sidedness . . .

Why isn’t Russia calling the shots on the USA, instead of vice versa? Russia is the only foreign entity in Syria legally . . . Also, couldn’t Assad make a proclamatin of some kind that any attack on Syrian Kurds is an attack on Syrian citizens and an act of war?

Henry Kissinger has a problem, the world has a problem, myopia is lord of all. Dr K. is at a loss; all he has to offer is but a humble path: to get from A to E one must first go though C and D. This path is not at all obvious, certain, nor is this path without dangers… [these are my musings after reading your link]

Yes,he is an excellent speaker. And more importantly,able to cut through the BS to “cut to the quick” of an argument. The MSM and their stooges like to confuse people by spinning so many points so the listener can’t understand the issue (I’ve seen it a million times). But he is able to turn that around and focus back onto the points of an argument. Few people have that ability.

CrossTalk “show” would be very interesting and informative – without Lavelle.

This way, its quality is not too far from that of made-for-sheeple “presidential debates” in the U.S.: who can blurt out his “opinion” faster – and who pleases the debate’s “moderator” (anything but…) more, just to be allowed a few seconds longer for his blurt without interruption.

BTW, Lavelle’s childish grimaces at each and every comment he does not like certainly do not help raise the level of the discourse.

I didn’t notice Lavelle grimacing, I was watching the person speaking–but so what if he did grimace? What would you do in response to Mr. Turkish Parliament’s one-note song?? I think Draitser, too, was “managing” his expression.
I think Ali in Beirut was also excellent, actually.
I didnt find Lavelle too intrusive. I mean, the guy in Istanbul was just not making sense. He was beating the drum for Turkish democracy, as though this point were enough to ignore any specific actions that clearly have not be voted on in parliament!
So, I think Lavelle was right, to kind of let others sideline him. Although PL did give Istanbul a more than one chance to speak and he kept bleeting the same message each time.
And Lavelle did NOT say to Mr. Istanbul what he said to someone else in another CT, which I thought was brilliant: “You are wasting the time on this show with a false premise!”
Katherine

As opposed to the plastic, manufactured, CGI enhanced standard for current Western MSM. Quite refreshing for those of us who can tell the difference. Some of us actually recall when there existed real journalism ; Pierre Salinger. Walter Cronkite – people who used to show human emotion when confronted by brutal realities. People nowadays would be amazed to watch for instance, Walter Cronkite call BS on the U.S. Gov’s attempt to claim victory after the Tet offensive. Personally, I think the time’s right for a revival of real journalism and Peter’s leading the way!

Anyone who agrees to go on Crosstalk will know Peter Lavelle’s open excitable manner and bias so they should know what to expect. He states that interruption is encouraged and the very name of the show is indicative of that style. Frequently everyone is pretty much on the same page but if there is a dissenter then they will get hounded 3 or 4 to 1. They have to expect that.

I agree with you though to a point -it would be good to have a discussion, another show, where each person gets a time window to make their point without interruption. A classic example being Gilbert Doctorow who is occasionally on Crosstalk and who is extremely good but, not surprisingly, has a rather professorial manner about him. He frequently investigates a point by asking a question, sometimes but not always rhetorical and which tends to fly over Lavelle’s head. We, the audience, lose the conclusion as Lavelle cuts the conversation off.

Yes, I definitely l have see the Lavelle-cutting-off-too-soon phenomenon.
With this format, people really have to have their act together to present their arguments clearly and in a way that does not ALLOW anyone else to interrupt. That is what is good about Draitser. He thinks well on his feet, constructs his argument as he goes. Very solid. There are a few other guests I have seen who can do this. If yui don’t have a very logical delivery, you might not get to the end. And if you are building a more complex argument, Lavelle, might get impatient. Which is a mistake for him, I think.

But some of his guests, altough excellent, do wander a bit, such as Dimo—he is a dear, and very smart, and I love the way he speaks, but he can end up on a little byway of some kind, then Peter cuts him off. But Draitser generally gets to finish his paragraph. Ali was also pretty good. One paid attention. Including, I guess, Peter L.

A house divided can not stand. Moon represents the people in a nation’s chart or in the chart of its leader. Fighting with the Kurds for no apparent reason and no goal other than to “kill them all”? Neptune ( higher love) and Saturn ( Karma of illicit action come home to roost) will team up to give Mr. Erdogan plenty of rope to with which to hang himself. As for the people of Turkey, well, they blew it big time 100 years ago with the Armenians and so Saturn will take its toll on the nation state of Turkey if they do not “get it” this time around with another minority. Expect Israel to play a role in picking the bones of the carcass clean.
Sic Semper Tyranis.

“ANKARA, Turkey — A Syrian national with links to Syrian Kurdish militia was the suicide bomber who killed at least 28 people in an attack targeting buses carrying military personnel, Turkey’s prime minister said Thursday.

Ahmet Davutoglu said that Turkey’s Kurdish rebels collaborated with the Syrian. The prime minister said authorities had detained nine people in connection with Wednesday’s rush-hour incident in the heart of Ankara.”

Just what the doctor ordered. A Syrian with ties to the Kurds.

(commenting is blocked or unavailable on this story at NBC, they do that every so often)

Have to commend Peter L on his persistent reminders of the legitimacy of Assad and the current Syrian government: the word ‘regime ‘is illegitimate and should never be used.

The guy from Beirut was pretty good – clear, accurate and precise.

Felt almost sorry for the visibly floundering Turkish guest – how to defend the indefensible?
You can’t. Emphasis on Turkish ‘parliamentary procedure’ just doesn’t cut the mustard. (Especially not the Turkish-smuggled gas version..)

Eric Draitser was excellent. How inspiring to see someone so privileged and talented opting for ‘truth-to-power’ instead of a comfortable, big bucks berth in the MSM.

A passionate, almost incandescent piece on the pathology of Israeli Zionism by ED (must read):

Yes, you are absolutely right, he gotta make the right noises, else he gets fired from his cushy job in Istanbul. (Or far worse, since Sultan Erdogan does not f. around, Turkish slammers for political dissenters are not pretty to behold from inside – if one is lucky to go to one, instead of being handed over to ISIL for a close haircut.)

By the same token, that Peter Lavelle phoney is paid to tread strictly the official government line, else he gets fired too. Hence his made-to-order babbling gobbledygook. What a boring propaganda show…

So you find guests of the calibre of Eric Draitser, Alexander Mercouris, Gilbert Doctorow et al boring? Perhaps geopolitics is not for you or you find only the exceptional ‘Manifest Destiny’ kind exciting? Or, do you need to have your opinions shaped for you by MSM memes, as in exciting Hollywood russophobe plots, Fox, CNN, NYT, WSJ, USA Today, Ministry of Truth, etc?

Another question: granted Peter Lavelle is opionionated but much of what is discussed on Crosstalk is all too true, so, is ‘propaganda’ that is true still propaganda? Doubtless it all depends on your definition of the word.

You are quite right. One man’s worn out clichés by paid propagandists are another man’s cherished objects of admiration by subjects of his adulation. One sees that charming phenomenon over and over in the American internal “political” scenery. Elsewhere too, ’tis international, no monopoly.

One seeks them here, one seeks them there – and one finds sheeple everywhere!

So Ralph, other than ad hominem and straw man fallacies do you actually have anything to critique on the content of the video? Did you actually watch it?

What are examples of ‘worn out clichés’, which presumably from your tone you consider false or exaggerated propaganda, from Ali and Draitser?

The only ‘worn out cliché’ I noticed was from the Istanbul speaker going on repetitively about Turkey being a democracy and that nothing could happen without parliamentary approval. Clearly disproven by the SU-24 incident.

The Saker family -all of us regulars here- await your erudite response.

You must be right in what you said: you can’t shape your own opinion, so someone’s gotta “shape” it for you. Is that gonna be the scaredy-Turk from Istanbul or … Lavelle and his employers? And how to decide which? The beauty of it is that you really don’t have to do that either. Simply follow the herd instinct. You seem to be doing fine so far, in your outro you even invoke the whole herd’s protection.

===
Answers dot com:
Q: “Is it a herd or sheeple or a flock of sheeple?”
A: “Sheeple can be a herd, a flock or even a mob.”

in Uk a huge percentage of population nearly half or more than halfdid not want to invade Iraq, no Parliamentary vote but guess what happened-democracy? just like the delusional Turkish guy on this programme, when democracy gets in the way it gets shoved out of the way by any means possible……………

Jan Egeland, the chair of a task force on humanitarian access in Syria, told reporters in the Swiss city of Geneva on Thursday that the UN’s World Food Programme (WFP) had a “concrete plan” for the Dayr al-Zawr operation in the coming days.

The US military is deploying weapons and equipment to Cold War era caves in Norway, as part of Washington’s push to station equipment near the NATO-Russia frontier.

“Any gear that is forward-deployed both reduces cost and speeds up our ability to support operations in crisis, so we’re able to fall in on gear that is ready-to-go and respond to whatever that crisis may be,” Col. William Bentley, operations officer for the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Brigade, said in a statement, CNoNews reported Thursday.

Another weapons of mass distraction theme taken root here?
I easily see this as a possible redux (but using ‘radiation’) of the Ft. Detrick anthrax unleashed right when Congress was vacillating on whether to pass the Patriot Act.

Swiss inspection group SGS has denied responsibility for security at a US company site in southern Iraq where highly dangerous radioactive material went missing last year.

Jokes abound in the comments about the upcoming joke of a rigged puppet show called the ‘4-year pres election’ all over.
Also about this, which has already been lampooned many places–Mount Trumpmore, starring Mein Hair (who else?):http://media.cagle.com/83/2015/08/26/168013_600.jpg

Sitemap

All the original content published on this blog is licensed by Saker Analytics, LLC under the Creative Commons CC-BY-SA 4.0 International license (creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0). For permission to re-publish or otherwise use non-original or non-licensed content, please consult the respective source of the content.